(Newser)
–
"We whined. We complained. We sued. We won our First Amendment lawsuit in federal court. And now @realDonaldTrump has unblocked me," University of Maryland sociology professor Philip Cohen tweeted Monday. The Justice Department later confirmed all seven plaintiffs who successfully argued President Trump violated their right to free speech by blocking them on Twitter had been unblocked following their court win two weeks ago, reports Reuters. Still, it's apparently too soon for them to celebrate. Trump and White House social media director Dan Scavino are appealing the ruling that determined the blocking of people who addressed the presidential account was a constitutional violation, Politico reports, citing notices filed by three DOJ officials on Monday.

Though the basis for the appeal wasn't made clear, DOJ attorney Michael Baer previously said "it would send the First Amendment deep into uncharted waters to hold that a president's choices about whom to follow, and whom to block, on Twitter—a privately run website that, as a central feature of its social-media platform, enables all users to block particular individuals from viewing posts—violate the Constitution," per Politico. A lawyer representing the seven plaintiffs says she's "disappointed that the government intends to appeal the district court's thoughtful and well-supported ruling," though she adds she's "pleased" to see blocked users regain their right to free speech. Among them: Texas police officer Brandon Neely. "I AM BACK!!!" he wrote to Trump on Monday. (Read more President Trump stories.)

What I find troubling about this is the element of political maneuvering by the plaintiffs. The Media follows suit making the thinnest of veiled arguments that, of course Donald Trump is un-Constitutional. What I see in this is detractors of the president insisting on access to every opportunity to interject their objections. It is, IMO the same as the Democrats sending hecklers into Trump events and provoking violence to discredit the President. Free Speech should never be a license for you to interrupt my conversation to interject your opinions or complaints. I have no dog in the Twitter issue as I am not a Twitter user nor do I consider this as anything more than a venue for the citizen, Donald Trump to reach out and connect with his supporters and serious debaters who want to understand, coincidentally the Administration. The plaintiffs are an opposition that demand equal time with Donald Trump's audience and what that says to me is that the opposition cannot garner their own audience and therefore are manipulating the Constitution to force Trump supporters to listen to their rants. Ironically, if the President blocks all his political opponents and objectors, they cannot hear his remarks nor will they be influenced by him. So what is the REAL problem here?

LJayne

Jun 6, 2018 1:23 PM CDT

lmao So he can't block certain people, until those people can block him. Our Twitt cheif got a little reality check with some of his nonsensical political bs.

ToddM

Jun 6, 2018 8:18 AM CDT

He will get it. The left's record at the supreme court is quite pathetic. How terrible for the left he has a platform run by lefties to gout around the left stream media and talk directly to America. Technology is kicking liberalisms butt.